Posts by Jeffro

171

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

Jeffro

KalebOutWest:

I've commented countless times how the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible) is viewed as a collection of religious texts, not historical ones. Religious truth and historical fact are very different things. One cannot expect to produce precise historical dates from religious narrative.

The stories the Jews wrote about the Neo-Babylonian period were interpretations of events that actually happened, and there are corresponding verifiable historical events. So it makes sense that details about the sequence of events they sought to explain are present in the stories. Though their explanations for the events are steeped in superstition (e.g., exile as a 'punishment from God' or Cyrus' general policy of religious tolerance twisted into a 'decree just for the Jews'), the chronological data contained in the relevant stories are consistent with the actual chronology of the period found in other sources. In this regard, the Jewish stories about the Neo-Babylonian period are not better or worse than Babylonian records that present historical details among other details grounded in religious belief. (The same obviously does not apply to earlier stories based on oral traditions such as the 'patriarchs' or the 'exodus', or other adaptations from Babylonian mythology such as the 'garden of Eden' or 'the flood'.)

However, in my analysis of 586 or 587?, I do nevertheless include the proviso:

As there are no known secular records that provide a specific date for the [destruction of Jerusalem], information from the Bible must be used. Whilst one might question the reliability of the Bible, if the details therein are not considered reliable for determining the date of Jerusalem’s destruction by Nebuchadnezzar, then no specific year can otherwise be asserted with any certainty.

JW superstitions about 607 BCE, of course, remain an utter failure whether the data in the Bible is reliable or not.

171

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

Jeffro

‘scholar’:

Poor boofhead who does not seem to understand that Chronology like any science is a 'work in progress'.

Notice how the dishonest ‘scholar’ shifts the goalposts. Initially he claimed that the Watch Tower Society ‘knew’ about 607 BCE since the 1870s (apparently proud of the fact that they’ve been wrong for so long):

What it proves is that scholars do not know the precise date for the Fall of Jerusalem, but celebrated WT scholars from the 1870s knew, and it is 607 BCE

But they didn’t have any ‘precise’ date since the 1870s at all. When it was pointed out that they actually believed it was 606 BCE then, and that they only changed it to 607 BCE in the 1940s (because it took them about 70 years to realise there was no ‘year 0’ after 1 BCE), he didn’t acknowledge his error, instead trying to reframe their change from one wrong year to another wrong year (which he had pretended never happened) as ‘progress’. 🤦‍♂️

With ‘logic’ like that, I suppose it’s unfair to expect him to understand how solstices work. 🤣

171

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

Jeffro

('scholar' is intellectually dishonest and doesn't actually care about facts, but I provide the answers for the benefit of honest readers.)

'scholar':

Why is it that scholars cannot resolve the 586 or 587 BCE controversy?

Fallacy of division, loaded language. The 'controversy' (a difference of one year based on ambiguity in the source materials available during the 19th century) exists because although modern scholarship favours 587 BCE (the correct year), some sources defer to the older (mostly religious) traditional dating without reviewing all the available information. No scholars independent of JWs support 607 BCE.

Why can scholars not precisely determine the beginning of the 70 years?

Religious scholars are divided on whether the number should be interpreted literally or figuratively (a fault of the ambiguity in the source materials). If interpreted literally, the period necessarily began in 609 BCE, 70 years before the definite end in 539 BCE. Babylon definitively removed the last vestige of Assyrian power in 609 BCE.

Why is it that scholars cannot agree as to an understanding of the 70 years

A combination of ambiguity in the source materials and fallacious (mostly religious) appeals to tradition.

How is it that nowhere in the Bible does it state that the 70 years was a period of Babylonish domination?

The question is predicated on a lie. Jeremiah 25:11-12 explicitly identifies the period has one of servitude to Babylon, as does Jeremiah 27:1-11 and 2 Chronicles 36:20.

Why do scholars ignore the clear testimony of Josephus' discussion of the 70 years?

This question is also predicated on a lie. Historians do not ignore Josephus (who wrote centuries after the events in question), but they balance his statements with contemporary Neo-Babylonian records, as well as other statements from Josephus himself:

Against Apion, Book I: "These accounts agree with the true histories in our books; for in them it is written that Nebuchadnezzar, in the eighteenth year of his reign, laid our temple desolate, and so it lay in that state of obscurity for fifty years; but that in the second year of the reign of Cyrus its foundations were laid"
Antiquities of the Jews, Book X: "Containing the interval of one hundred and eighty-two years and a half. From the captivity of the ten tribes to the first year of Cyrus."

Why do scholars ignore the missing 7 years of Neb's reign?

Red herring. There are no missing 7 years as the story in Daniel is not a historical account. However, even if it were historical, the total duration of Nebuchadnezzar's reign (inclusive any '7 years of madness') is the same in the JW chronology. JW chronology also does not specify any specific 7 year period. The Bible's references to Jehoiachin's release from prison in the first year of Evil-Merodach makes it impossible to add 7 years to the total length of Nebuchadnezzar's reign.

Why is it the case that no peer review of Furuli's analysis is published in academic journals?

Furuli did not submit his work for peer review. It is self-published. Where Furuli's views are mentioned by scholars, they are rejected.

Why is it the case that critics of Furuli's research do not use the same methodology that has produced conflicting results?

Furuli's claims about the lunar observations are demonstrably false. Honest assessment of the observations necessarily conflicts with Furuli's dishonest 'findings'.

How do scholars account for the Babylonian gap of 20 years between secular and Bible Chronology?

Scholars recognise that there is no "gap of 20 years". For the Neo-Babylonian period, 'Bible chronology' is consistent with secular history. It is only the fringe JW interpretation that is contradictory.

171

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

Jeffro

🤦‍♂️ there’s no telling the wilfully ignorant. But other readers can see your lies for what they are.

It would be nice if aqwsed12345 could quit with the ‘walls of text’ too. If only there were a way of just giving a brief summary and linking to more substantive text. 🧐

171

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

Jeffro

‘scholar’:

What it proves is that scholars do not know the precise date for the Fall of Jerusalem,

Fallacy of division. Just because not everyone knows something, it doesn’t mean no one does. Most modern scholarship recognises that 587 BCE is the correct year, despite various (mostly religious) sources using faulty appeals to tradition for 586 BCE.

The precise date is 29 July 587 BCE. See 586 or 587?

but celebrated WT scholars from the 1870s knew, and it is 607 BCE

Poor doofus doesn’t even seem to know they said it was in 606 BCE until the 1940s. 🤣 When they finally realised there was no ‘year 0’ between 1 BCE and 1 CE, they moved it to 607 BCE to retain their superstitious numerology about 1914.

171

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

Jeffro

Oh come on, aqwsed12345. What’s with these long screeds of text that are obviously pasted from some other source without any attribution?

All that text and you don’t even make the connection between the period of paying off sabbaths in 2 Chronicles 36 with Leviticus 25-26?

For more straightforward explanations of the subject, see 607 for Beginners and Jehovah’s Witnesses and 1914

171

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

Jeffro

'scholar':

A pretty coloured chart is not scholarship you should take a look at Furuli' scholarship wherein he presents scores of pages of analysis proving that VAT 4956 is properly dated to 588 BCE and not the 568 BCE nonsense.

He's still distracted by the 'pretty colours'. It's a pity (for him) that he can't refute the words. 🤣

Still prattling on about fringe author Furuli. 🤦‍♂️🤣🙄

171

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

Jeffro

‘scholar’:

Partly correct for the opening chapters of the book of Revelation but according to the events inspired by vision began from the lord's Day which we know commenced in 1914 CE which also concerned historical developments with the Lord's people- Jehovah's Witnesses.

😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣🤣😂🤣

Obviously I won’t be taking advice from you about interpreting Revelation. The arrogant delusion that Revelation is about JWs gave me a good laugh though.

171

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

Jeffro

Duran:

The correct understanding is the 'appointed times of the nations' (gentile times) are 42 months/the 2nd woe and are future when the 8th king is given authority. That is the time of the GT and Jesus comes AFTER that time and that is when Rev 11:15/3rd woe is fulfilled.
Still future:
Trumpets 1-5
Trumpet 6
Trumpet 7 (last trumpet)

No. The 42 months (specifically the ‘trampling of the holy city’) was indeed the ‘great tribulation’ but it culminated in 70 CE. Jesus was expected to return shortly after (‘within a generation’ of his death) but he didn’t. Revelation is about the 1st and early 2nd centuries. The ’7th trumpet’ was simply a historical failure based on early Christian superstitions rather than ‘still future’. There’s no need to replace ‘scholar’s’ faulty superstitions with other faulty superstitions.

171

Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan in

it-1 p. 493 communication - "when the circumcision issue was resolved by the governing body in jerusalem......".

it-1 p. 881 galatians, letter to the - "by reason of a revelation, paul, with barnabas and titus, went to jerusalem regarding the circumcision issue; he learned nothing new from james, peter, and john, but they recognized that he had been empowered for an apostleship to the nations.

" (galatians 2:1-10).

Jeffro

Such analysis by Dr. Rolf Furuli a linguist in Semitics and used several astro programs was able to determine the following:

Furuli. 🤦‍♂️

13 sets of lunar observations matched 588 BCE and not 586 BCE

Poor 'scholar' seems to forget that I have personally checked all the observations. And it's 568 BCE doofus. Let's review the lunar observations for 588 BCE... even if we ignore the planetary observations, it's not good.

15 sets of planetary observations were backward calculations made to fit 586 for Neb's 37 the year

586 again?? Anyway... this is an assertion based on wishful thinking, not a determination based on evidence. Back in reality, all the planetary observations match 568 BCE perfectly, which is why 'scholar' and other Watch Tower Society shills are so keen to dismiss them.